They'd certainly discover what reverb is!
Simple Minds "Sparkle in the Rain" (March 2015)
- Thread starter rtbluray
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
They'd certainly discover what reverb is!
alk3997
500 Club - QQ All-Star
Let me try a simple remixing versus remastering explanation that may help,
If an audio engineer follows the usual methods, the recording is made by first making a multitrack master recording. This can be as small as four tracks (in the old days) and can go up to usually 96 tracks (I think my current software permits 256 tracks). In the late 70s, early 80s, a lot of studios still had 24 track recorders and then 48 tracks. These multitrack recordings are the 1st generation recordings. These tapes are usually 2-inch tapes when tape was used.
The mixing phase was next, where the 1st generation recordings were mixed. This could be another 2 or 3 generations since sometimes effects were added to the first generation and rerecorded with with the effects. The output from the mix would be recorded on another tape. For analog stereo, that could be 2-track quarter inch tape. For digital stereo, DAT tapes were sometimes used before the hard drive and the internet took over.
The mastering engineer would then take the mixed tape and create the disc (compact or vinyl) from the mix tape - adding yet another generation if it was going to an analog device.
So, now in the 2014 timeframe, some really good software has been developed to take the mixed tape (or digital recording) and clean them up. This preserves the original mix (nothing accidentally left out) but "polishes" the recording. However, other than cleaning up hiss, it does nothing to remove the generations of tape in the whole process that led up to the original mastering.
One other thing that can be done is very simple. The original RIAA equalization curve for turntables can be removed from the original mastering. Some mixed-down tapes had the equalization added before mastering and record companies in their rush to release CDs never took out the curve or did a bad job of removing it. So, the resultant CDs were generated with not enough bass and too much high end.
For a remixing, the studio engineer and producer go back to the original multitrack tapes (or bits) and start over again with the mixing process. Sometimes they try to follow the original mix and sometimes they don't. When taking a song that never had a 5.1-channel mix before, it's tough to follow an original mix exactly and yet still end up with an interesting 5.1-channel mix. Of course, the original multitrack tapes (or at least a clean copy) have to still be around to make remixing possible. It seems in the early 1970s many studios were running out of space and dumped their multitrack tapes or reused them. Then in the late-1970s the tape formulation changes made the later tapes sticky or brittle over time which has destroyed many of the multitracks from that era.
Both remixing and remastering take time to do correctly. However, remixing is much more complicated but has the possibility of going back to the first generation recordings and therefore can provide a much greater improvement than remastering. The remastering tools are starting to get so good that it's getting harder to tell for stereo recordings.
While the terms are similar, remixing and remastering should never be confused since they apply to different parts of the recording process. Remixing goes back further into the recording process than remastering.
If an audio engineer follows the usual methods, the recording is made by first making a multitrack master recording. This can be as small as four tracks (in the old days) and can go up to usually 96 tracks (I think my current software permits 256 tracks). In the late 70s, early 80s, a lot of studios still had 24 track recorders and then 48 tracks. These multitrack recordings are the 1st generation recordings. These tapes are usually 2-inch tapes when tape was used.
The mixing phase was next, where the 1st generation recordings were mixed. This could be another 2 or 3 generations since sometimes effects were added to the first generation and rerecorded with with the effects. The output from the mix would be recorded on another tape. For analog stereo, that could be 2-track quarter inch tape. For digital stereo, DAT tapes were sometimes used before the hard drive and the internet took over.
The mastering engineer would then take the mixed tape and create the disc (compact or vinyl) from the mix tape - adding yet another generation if it was going to an analog device.
So, now in the 2014 timeframe, some really good software has been developed to take the mixed tape (or digital recording) and clean them up. This preserves the original mix (nothing accidentally left out) but "polishes" the recording. However, other than cleaning up hiss, it does nothing to remove the generations of tape in the whole process that led up to the original mastering.
One other thing that can be done is very simple. The original RIAA equalization curve for turntables can be removed from the original mastering. Some mixed-down tapes had the equalization added before mastering and record companies in their rush to release CDs never took out the curve or did a bad job of removing it. So, the resultant CDs were generated with not enough bass and too much high end.
For a remixing, the studio engineer and producer go back to the original multitrack tapes (or bits) and start over again with the mixing process. Sometimes they try to follow the original mix and sometimes they don't. When taking a song that never had a 5.1-channel mix before, it's tough to follow an original mix exactly and yet still end up with an interesting 5.1-channel mix. Of course, the original multitrack tapes (or at least a clean copy) have to still be around to make remixing possible. It seems in the early 1970s many studios were running out of space and dumped their multitrack tapes or reused them. Then in the late-1970s the tape formulation changes made the later tapes sticky or brittle over time which has destroyed many of the multitracks from that era.
Both remixing and remastering take time to do correctly. However, remixing is much more complicated but has the possibility of going back to the first generation recordings and therefore can provide a much greater improvement than remastering. The remastering tools are starting to get so good that it's getting harder to tell for stereo recordings.
While the terms are similar, remixing and remastering should never be confused since they apply to different parts of the recording process. Remixing goes back further into the recording process than remastering.
hafquark
400 Club - QQ All-Star
I propose that everyone on here who mistakes remastering for REMIXING (which is actually what Steven Wilson does) should be forced to listen to a Silverline dual disc…
But still, nice that you scored "Once Upon A Time" for a good price. I'd love to get both of the older DVDAs myself.
Of course, you're right. Creating a 5.1 mix from scratch would require a remix. I'm not an audio engineer or anywhere close to one, and claim no special knowledge of recording processes. I tend to use the term "remaster" as a catch-all for newly re-issued recordings.
Yeah, Silverline's were usually bad, but they released at least a couple of excellent sounding dual discs. Gordon Goodwin's Big Phat Band "Swingin' for the Fences" is really a nice one.
Best to just say reissue, as sometimes reissues are simply remasters of the original mix, while other times they actually are brand new remixes but regardless of which they are, they are most definitely reissues. That's a fact.
I have to say even with a Steven Wilson surround mix I have no interest in this.
I just never got Simple Minds at all !! like a number of 80's bands (Simth's U2's albums up to Zooropa for instance )
Thankfully Steve keeps churning out other mixes so it wont be long before something I do want comes along.
I just never got Simple Minds at all !! like a number of 80's bands (Simth's U2's albums up to Zooropa for instance )
Thankfully Steve keeps churning out other mixes so it wont be long before something I do want comes along.
I tend to like dark music and Simple Minds has many dark songs within their catalog of albums. This album is one of their darkest and "East At Easter" off of SPARKLE IN THE RAIN is one of my favorites. As a matter of fact, I need to pull this record out and have a listen because it's been a while. I just love "Book Of Brilliant Things" too, feel it's the best commercial sounding song on the album, and was surprised it never became a hit single.
The first SIMPLE MINDS record I purchased when it was released was NEW GOLD DREAM. From there, I discovered their back catalog. After that, I purchased every release up to GOOD NEWS FROM THE NEXT WORLD. It wasn't until early 2000 that I started to catch up with the current stuff and wasn't too impressed. Recently, I purchased their latest release BIG MUSIC. Though, compressed, it's a really good album that reminds me a lot of their earlier electronic work. I recently purchased and watched CELEBRATE, their live Blu-ray disc and found their most earliest work they performed sounded the best. Did not much care for their choice for the background singer. She just did not sound right with a lot of their mid period songs where they used a female background singer but I do recommend this disc because it was pretty good overall.
I wanted to say too that from NEW GOLD DREAM up to GOOD NEWS FROM THE NEXT WORLD (six records), each one was different even though they had a signature Simple Minds sound. To me, that's what a band should aspire to, not sound the same with each album release.
I feel the same way. More prog rock please.
Or even.....ROCK. I feel same...but....am happy for continued titles being released....but....
Absolutely.....or Chili Peppers....Earth Wind Fire...oh man.
They already did "That's The Way Of The World" in surround.
Don't really care for the Chili Peppers. I doubt there will ever be a surround release of one of their records.
And since we are waaaay off topic, it's time to get back to talk about SIMPLE MINDS.
I'd like to see these albums mixed in surround:
Empires and Dance
Sons and Fascination
Sister Feelings Call
Street Fighting Years
Big Music
I'd like to see these albums mixed in surround:
Empires and Dance
Sons and Fascination
Sister Feelings Call
Street Fighting Years
Big Music
They already did "That's The Way Of The World" in surround.
Don't really care for the Chili Peppers. I doubt there will ever be a surround release of one of their records.
You sure, thought it was only SACD stereo?? They did a Thats the Way of the World:Live in 75 as Multi though
Maybe, it was quad? Not sure. I will have to dig out my copy since I have not heard it in years.
The Rang
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
The original CD sounds pretty nasty, almost unlistenable IMHO.
Hopefully SW can correct that mess, I'll wait for SQ reviews before dropping my money on this one
Hopefully SW can correct that mess, I'll wait for SQ reviews before dropping my money on this one
Yes, I was wrong. It's from a Quad LP. Maybe, Audio Fidelity will eventually release it, along with "Head To The Sky".
Really? I don't have the original CD to compare but have the 2002 reissue and it's not too bad. Listenable but this record always had that compressed sound to it and is begging to be opened up by 5.1.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
HiRez Poll Mayer, John - HEAVIER THINGS [SACD]- Latest: Dynamic Editor
-
New David Gilmour record Luck and Strange Sept. 6 2024 (Atmos BluRay)- Latest: HiFiWiFiWeAllFi
-
